How to File an Appeal, Question a Call

Full Circle

July 13, 2016

Source: Allen Gingerich

Criteria of Qualified, Selecting Judges and Honor Rules

Q: “What if it’s the Judge’s dog?”

A: That is a question that comes up a lot in regards to hunting judges. We can’t stress enough the importance of selecting qualified individuals to judge. The criteria of “qualified” must always come with more than having several trials under the belt. Three must-have credentials include:

1. Have a good understanding of the rules.
2. Be unbiased.
3. Be trustworthy.

On page 36 of your current Hunting Beagle Rulebook, you’ll see the title of the running rules is “Official Hunting Beagle Honor Rules”. Therefore, another important credential is that the judges “honor” the rules, as applicable, in every situation period. The three listed credentials are a must. One without the other is no good.

Starting on page 46 of the rulebook (MOH/HD Guidelines), you’ll find references on how judges should be selected. The days of drawing four dogs to a cast and then selecting or having the cast decide which one of the four will judge is unacceptable practice. That method MUST be a thing of the past.

There is a much better drawing system that is so much better for the club, the official, the hunters and the sport in general. Select the number of judges needed for each category and stick them to the scorecards first. This method, provided the club selects qualified individuals with the credentials required to judge, assures the club a much better hunt for everyone involved, not to mention fewer questions and issues. You’ll hear some officials suggest this method takes too long. What? It doesn’t take any longer than any other! If UKC can do it at the Nationals with over 300 dogs in the hunt, I’m convinced it will never be too much trouble at any other hunt. Please refer to the rulebook for more information on this drawing method.

Back to the question, “what if it’s the judge’s dog?” “If” event officials consider the comments above, then: If the judge struck the wrong dog, then the same rule is going to apply to his dog as all other dogs. If it’s the judge’s dog not hunting, he’s going to start the clock as quick as he will for any other dog. If it’s the judge’s dog that was off the line too far, he’s not going to award his dog speed and drive points. When there’s a split track, he’s going to put the cast in a position to score the first track, even if his dog is one of those trailing on the opposite track. And he’s not going to allow any of the other handlers to stall about scoring the first track regardless of which track their dogs are on. The list goes on and on.

UKC alone cannot fix judging issues. We need club officials and all Beaglers to be on board and help us in this effort. When following the guidelines and those selected judges meet the three most important criteria, you’ll find that problems on casts are diminished significantly. And most of those “what if it’s the judge’s dog” questions are eliminated.

Questioning a Call After It’s Too Late

Q: I was hunting my dog in a trial last weekend where I questioned my dog not getting scored on a line. We voted on it in the field. The judge and one other guy voted not to score, while me and another handler voted the dogs should have scored. I know that a 2/2 vote stays with the way the judge ruled it, but I still have the right to ask for a question to be put on the card and let the Master of Hounds rule on it. That is what I did. However, the Master of Hounds denied my question citing I did not question it when I should have. Here is the situation.

The line in question was the third line on this one rabbit. After scoring that line, we called time out and handled the dogs. My dog kept on running that track and it took me about 15 or 20 minutes to get him caught. When I returned to the trucks, the guide said we were going to drive two miles down the road to a different spot to finish the hunt. On the way to that next spot, the one handler who was riding with me told me that he would have scored my dog on that line. That’s what I thought as well, so when we got to our spot and before turning loose again I asked for a cast vote on that last line that was scored. The vote was 2 to 2, so I asked to put a question on the scorecard. I did tell the judge that I would remove my question if at the end of our hunt that line would not make any difference in the outcome. Everyone was fine with it. As it turned out, that line would have made a difference in winning or losing the cast so I left the question on the card. After explaining the situation to the Master of Hounds, he ruled that I did not question it when I should have, therefore he could not consider the question. I understand that you can’t question something after the hunt, but we had not even turned loose again, so how can my question be denied?

A: Thanks for your question. There’s two different parts to address and elaborate on. First, given the time frame in which you questioned your dog not scoring on that line, was rightfully denied because the rules don’t allow for it to be heard. There’s a rule found under section 14 which clearly states: {Situations not questioned and notated at the time Judge’s decision is made, will not be considered.} The Master of Hounds’ hands are tied by that rule.

The decision to not score your dog came immediately after the pack came through the line. Not after you handled the dog, or 25 minutes later, before you turned loose at the next drop. In other words, you did not question it at the time of scoring. If a situation comes up without a handler questioning it immediately (at the time it happens), then there’s no option to question it at any time later. At least not for the purpose of making any scoring changes.

Secondly, any question pertaining to whether or not a dog met the criteria to be scored on line is purely a judgement call. The judge makes that call. If anyone does not agree with the call, they have the option to question it and ask for a cast vote. Again, it needs to be asked right away. Not one, two or ten minutes later. It takes a majority vote to overturn a judge’s decision. In this case it was 2/2 and not a majority to overturn, so it stays the way the judge called it to begin with. As long as the judge clearly understands what the criteria is, then the Master of Hounds should or could not even consider to rule otherwise. He’s not out there to see it and give his opinion. The point is, accept the fact that a majority does not have the same opinion as you do. It doesn’t necessarily mean you, or those voting otherwise, are right or wrong.

Putting a question on the scorecard that pertains to a judgement call (the judgement of those who saw it), in most cases only makes a handler look foolish to bring the whole cast back to the Master of Hounds for a ruling, much like a debate of whether a dog barked three times or four times. How could the Master of Hounds make that call without having been out there and hearing it? He couldn’t. In essence you would be asking the official to choose who he believes and who he doesn’t. It doesn’t work that way. Along these same lines, that’s why it’s also so very important that the official select judges who not only have a good understanding of the rules but who also have the reputation of being honest and unbiased.

Filing an Appeal After It’s Too Late

Q: At our last hunt we had a question come back to me, as the Master of Hounds. After I ruled on the question, one handler requested a panel to hear the question. He paid the $10 panel fee, and we assembled a panel. The panel ruled the same way I did. I thought the handler was satisfied until about an hour later when he came back to me requesting an Appeal Form. I told him that he needed to make this request immediately after the panel made their decision, and that it was now too late to file an appeal to UKC. He informed me that I was wrong about that and that he had one hour after the deadline to file an appeal. He would not take my response for and answer and insisted on it so I gave him the form. I did include a note with it noting the time he requested the appeal, along with the $20 appeal fee and sent it to UKC. Was this the right way to handle it or should I have just refused to give him the Appeal Form?

A: You did the right thing by advising the handler of the proper procedure and the time frame in which he needed to request to file an Appeal. It sounds like the handler wasn’t going to accept anything less. Either he can accept your information and know that it won’t do any good to file it after the fact, or be ignorant about it and hear it from UKC when the appeal is denied. Of course, UKC is bound by that same procedural rule; therefore, the appeal was not considered. And, yes, it ended up being a $20 learning experience. That was his choice.